When is an e-scooter a bike?
For the moment, it isn't. But if a few US statehouses have their way, the two could be, for all intents and purposes, equal.
Most cycling advocates and bicycle industry insiders don't have a problem with e-scooters per se. Like e-bikes, they are seen as quiet and less-polluting alternatives to automobiles, especially in urban areas. In fact, some electric scooter-sharing companies also run bike-sharing systems and are members of the People for Bikes Coalition.
Here's the rub: Bills on the table in 27 states seek to provide a legal footing for e-scooter rental and use, which is still illegal in many areas. The problem, according to Morgan Lommele, is that those basically seek to provide legal parity between bicycles, e-bikes and e-scooters. That leads to situations like the one called for in California's bill: Scooter- and bike-share systems would be required to maintain general-liability insurance.
That requirement would be especially onerous for non-profit bike-share systems or small bike-rental companies, which usually require riders to sign a waiver when they hop on a bike. The California bill, Lommele says, "implicates bikes and lumps bike share with scooter share." In other words, bicyclists would bear the blame for the high cost of sharing or renting a scooter.
As bad as California's bill is, one in Florida is even worse: it would lump "motorized bicycles" into the same category as "micromobility devices" for the purpose of regulating electric scooter-share systems. Lommele wants "motorized bicycles removed from that definition" to "avoid any negative consequences for bike-share operators in the state.
Of course, it's hard not to imagine that the consequences of Florida's bill, if passed, could be as bad for bike-share programs as the potential outcomes of California's bill--and similar legislative proposals in other states. One reason why they are even being discussed is something I didn't realize until yesterday: The scooter-share companies are "massive multi-billion dollar operations, heavily backed by venture capital," according to Lommele. They are "aggressively seeking market share" from bicycles and e-bikes.
For the moment, it isn't. But if a few US statehouses have their way, the two could be, for all intents and purposes, equal.
Most cycling advocates and bicycle industry insiders don't have a problem with e-scooters per se. Like e-bikes, they are seen as quiet and less-polluting alternatives to automobiles, especially in urban areas. In fact, some electric scooter-sharing companies also run bike-sharing systems and are members of the People for Bikes Coalition.
Here's the rub: Bills on the table in 27 states seek to provide a legal footing for e-scooter rental and use, which is still illegal in many areas. The problem, according to Morgan Lommele, is that those basically seek to provide legal parity between bicycles, e-bikes and e-scooters. That leads to situations like the one called for in California's bill: Scooter- and bike-share systems would be required to maintain general-liability insurance.
That requirement would be especially onerous for non-profit bike-share systems or small bike-rental companies, which usually require riders to sign a waiver when they hop on a bike. The California bill, Lommele says, "implicates bikes and lumps bike share with scooter share." In other words, bicyclists would bear the blame for the high cost of sharing or renting a scooter.
 |
| Spin e-scooter share system, Jefferson City, Missouri. Photo by Tony Webster |
As bad as California's bill is, one in Florida is even worse: it would lump "motorized bicycles" into the same category as "micromobility devices" for the purpose of regulating electric scooter-share systems. Lommele wants "motorized bicycles removed from that definition" to "avoid any negative consequences for bike-share operators in the state.
Of course, it's hard not to imagine that the consequences of Florida's bill, if passed, could be as bad for bike-share programs as the potential outcomes of California's bill--and similar legislative proposals in other states. One reason why they are even being discussed is something I didn't realize until yesterday: The scooter-share companies are "massive multi-billion dollar operations, heavily backed by venture capital," according to Lommele. They are "aggressively seeking market share" from bicycles and e-bikes.
